Unsurprisingly, there's only one topic on the British theatre blogs this week: the comprehensive spending review (CSR). When it was announced that Arts Council England (ACE) would be taking a 29.6% hit, but that only 15% of this could be passed on to "frontline" arts organisations, the initial response of many was to breathe a wary sigh of relief. Louise de Winter of the National Campaign for the Arts, for example, said: "It's a rum day when cuts of 15% can now be greeted with some measure of relief; we're not saying these cuts won't hurt, but they will be more manageable than was previously feared."

But as with all things, the Jeremy Hunt-shaped devil is in the detail. And there has been much discussion of how cuts in other areas of the CSR will further impact upon the arts. As Aleks Sierz points out: "I must say that such signs of relief are a bit irritating, and short-sighted. They suggest that people who work in the arts are only sustained by the arts. In reality, everyone who works in the arts needs a place to live, access to childcare and perhaps also needs healthcare for an aged parent … So the general cuts will affect all of us who have an interest in the arts — let's not forget that!"

We will have to wait to see precisely where the real pain of these cuts will be felt, but as Simon Jenkins says: "Everyone knows the price will be paid by museums, theatres and festivals throughout the provinces." This focus on the damage to our regional arts infrastructure is reflected across the blogosphere. The Art in Liverpool blog quotes Dr David Fleming of National Museums Liverpool (NML) who said: "A 15% cut is on top of a 3.5% cut earlier this year which led to several NML improvement schemes being cancelled. We now need to look at the figures closely. We will do our best to cope but our service to the public will suffer."

Taking a broader view, the Creative Stoke blog has identified three areas in which regional arts might take an indirect hit. Firstly the transport settlement will mean "higher long-distance rail and bus fares, with knock-on effects on long-distance pleasure travel to events and heritage sites". Secondly, cuts to local councils will mean that "there will be a temptation for councils to cut 'soft' services, like arts and culture". (Indeed Somerset county council is already considering axing all arts funding from next year.) And thirdly, the £4bn cut to the Scottish and Welsh administrations could have a "knock-on effect on cultural services".

Another question, of course, is: what counts as a 'frontline organisation'? The British Theatre Guide blog argues that the culture secretary "seems to define the 'frontline' as Regularly Funded Organisations (RFOs), but what about events like the Manchester International Festival (being biennial it's not an RFO)? Or what about Grants for the Arts? This is money given to non-RFOs for all kinds of projects, which could be new writing, experimental theatre or dance, or aimed at involving more people in the arts."

Graham Hitchen is also questioning this definition of "frontline". He points out that: "Education activity is unlikely to fit that bill: Creative Partnerships, as was, has already gone. So expect any educational or community-focused work to be considered 'back-office'." And he adds: "Second-tier organisations, supporting infrastructure or promoting partnerships across other sectors (for example, A&B) can hardly be called 'frontline'. So, their sterling work in leveraging support from other sectors, or advocating on behalf of a fragile sector is likely to suffer dramatically." This also means, inevitably, that many of the "frontline" artists who supplement their incomes by working in these ancillary sectors are also going to take a hit.

Of course, all of this also rests on the assumption that ACE can keep the cut to frontline organisations as low as 15%. But given the scale of cuts that Hunt's department is demanding ACE makes to itself – a whopping 50% – this is by no means guaranteed. Hunt may well be hoping that if ACE is forced to pass on larger cuts to RFOs then it, rather than he, will take the blame. But this cannot be allowed to happen. Despite what he himself may think, Hunt has demonstrated that he has neither the competence nor the desire to protect the arts in this country. He must not be let off the hook.